"Egy autó áll a kapuhoz, én pedig az autóhoz állok."

Translation:A car drives up to the gate, and I walk up to the car.

August 31, 2016

This discussion is locked.


Sentences like this make me think I will never learn Hungarian. Isn't áll - stand?


Yes. :)
The car comes to a stand at the gate and I go over and stand by the car.


Thank you for the explanation. But I would never cone up with a translation like that :)


Yeah, English is a bit weird there. Doesn't like combining verbs of no movement with directional indicators, so you have to get creative.


Thanks a lot! :)


Lol, it seems natural to me!


Why "up to" and not just "to"? Also, how are we supposed to guess the verb? I wrote "A car goes to the gate, and I go to the car." What in the above sentence would make that wrong?


The weirdnesses of English. :´D

"Drives/pulls up to" implies the car is close to the gate and moves in such a matter that it ends up parking right in front of it. This is what the Hungarian sentence is expressing.
"Drives to" rather means that it's a bit further away, and the gate is it's general goal, but it may not end up right there. Might park in a parking lot instead and the driver walks over to the gate.

And cars don't exactly "go", unless traffic "goes slow" or something. Cars drive, park, pull up, or generally "move".


Generally yes, but regionally sometimes it is said "is the car going?" to mean "is the car sitting in the driveway while turned on" or some similar situation.


Ah, certainly. I think most people would say "The car is running" in this case, though.


áll=drives up? ❤❤❤?


That's how cars move, by driving, whereas people move by walking.

The movement is implied by the -hoz endings.

At the end of the movement, the car and the person stand, which is why áll is used.

But in English, we can't "stand to somewhere". (Despite valiant attempts by the course to teach this construction.) So the concept of movement in those sentences has to be expressed somehow else in English.


It is very difficult to guess whether Duolingo will want a more direct translation, or such an indirect translation as this. It is difficult to guess that this indirect translation is the one that it wants. I find this unit very frustrating. It hasn't gotten any better since the last time I practiced it, although I am reporting a lot.


In some other sentence with "áll" + "-hoz/hez/höz" ("A rendorok az ajtóhoz áll" or sth like that) a translation "The policemen stand by the door" is accepted. So, naturally, I'd try it here and it obviously does not work. I get the whole "stand to sth" issue that is invalid in English. But I don't get why basically same stuff is accepted in one case and not in the other. Or is it just not same?


An argument that people often make is that cars apparently don't exactly "stand" in English. I don't think that is weird, but then again I'm not a native. :´)

I really enjoy the "pulls up" translation for this situation, which is accepted in a few sentences. A car moves to some spot and comes to a halt there.


A car is considered to be "standing" if it is in a spot with its motor running (i.e., the driver is letting off a passenger for example).


The nightmare sentence of vague possibilities where English has numerous permutations that mean much the same but the computer can't cope with all of them. I put " a car parks at the gate and I go up to the car" but it wasn't accepted. Now, the verb for getting to the car which the computer wants is walk but, of course, setal is nowhere to be seen. I would say that go is just as accurate. Equally, we know that, in this instance, all doesn't simply mean stand because kapuhoz denotes movement. If a car parks at the gate, it's just the same as if it drove up to the gate and stopped. So, what we have here is a sentence which requires memory. You have to know what the computer is willing to accept rather than what is an acceptable translation. We will all despair of this one!


This time I tried it with another version: A car drives up to the gate, whereas I stand at (or to) the car. My problem in this sentence is, that I see too many possibilities. Is it one car or two? Standing, driving, parking, walking up too.....???. Copy and paste is the only solution here.


A car goes to the gate, and I walk up to the car. - Egy autó megy a kapuhoz, én pedig felsétálok az autóhoz.


A car pulls up to the gate and I go to stand at the car. Not accepted and most certainly reported. This business of standing and moving causes great difficulty but all it means is getting from point A to point B and standing. Walk up to the car is one way of doing it but I think it's less accurate. Go to stand tells the reader or listener that movement stops once the car is reached and that standing is what happens at that point. A year ago I see I said we would all despair of this one and until the computer is as creative as Ryagon IV suggests, our despair will continue.


Why not "moves to" for both? That makes sense in English and doesn't provide many different and incorrect translations like this.


Will I ever understand? In the previous sentece "go" was rejected ,and the car was standing by the fence ,here I try ""stand" and it is rejected again! If I am right "áll"means "to go and stand,to move up to". Isn't it rather a problem with the English translation,altjough we can understand what it means in Hungarian?


Áll generally means "to stand", and if used with something that indicates that a movement is happening, it means something like "move to that point and end up standing there". English doesn't have one single satisfying way to translate this concept, so there's a lot of working-around happening in this course. There are many ways to express that in English, and this course is still in beta stage, so not all the answers are accepted yet. Please report anything you come across that you think should be accepted.


A car parks at the gate and I go and stand by the car - I would have thought that the sense of the Hungarian is maintained in this translation.


A car parks by the gate and I stand by the car. Not accepted, reported. This is getting worse and worse because the translation from the Hungarian is fanciful to say the least and impossible to guess. Let's look at what's going on here: 1) The car is moving to a position nearer to the gate and stopping. It parks by the gate or at the gate. Yes, it also drives up to the gate and stops but parks by the gate amounts to the same thing. 2) I stand by the car. If the car has just moved up to the gate and stopped or has parked by the gate, how can I stand next to it other than by moving? I don't think we would interpret this to mean that the car parked in such a position that I ended up standing by it because the car had driven to where I was standing. If a car has just parked and I stand by it, the inference is that I have gone to stand by it. To translate this as "I walk up to the car" is surely inaccurate. It doesn't tell the listener that I end up standing by the car, it only tells the listener that I make the journey to it.

2 years ago I was despairing of these. It was the same a year ago and it's the same today. Until Duo finds ways of using the words so that the English is at least similar to the Hungarian, it's just a pointless memory exercise. We know what these sentences mean but pulling the English words out of the word mixer to get what Duo wants is borderline impossible unless we write down the answers purely for that purpose.


~hoz implies motion towards the thing to which it is attached.


Áll is stand, how are we to get drive and walk from that


how are we to get drive and walk from that

From the directional case suffixes which indicate movement.

You can't "stand to a place" in English, so you have to translate this combination of "move to a place and stand there" with a verb that indicates movement such as "walk" or "drive".


How about, "going to walk/drive there?"


The difficulty with this lies not so much in what it means but in how to replicate it in English. Áll = stands and hoz = to. Stands to in English isn't ideal. I don't think it's so awful that it should be struck down on sight but it isn't ideal. So, what do we say? Look at my earlier comments. Pulls up to the gate? Not accepted. Parks at the the gate? Not accepted. Yes, it's crazy and there are many ways of getting there in English but Duo will only accept some of them. What we have here is drives up to the gate and it's purely a memory exercise or a matter of writing down the answer and regurgitating it next time around.

It's just the same with the second half of the question. Állok = I stand and hoz = to. I stand to isn't ideal again. We can stand to attention but standing to a gate sounds a bit odd. So, what could we have? I go and stand at the gate. I go and stand by the gate. I walk up to the gate. And so on and so on but, again, Duo won't accept them all so exactly the same comment arises. It's a memory exercise or a regurgitation exercise. We know what it means, we can picture the activity in our heads; the struggle is to find a formula by which to express it in English which Duo will accept.


How would, 'The car is parked at the gate and I am standing by the car.'....be translated.



Your proposed sentence involves no movement so the hoz/hez endings become replaced by nál/nél. Az auto a kapunál áll és én az autónál állok. I've used és for "and" but there's a pedig option. Az auto a kapunál áll, én pedig az autónál.

The hoz/hez varieties involving movement in connection with the English verb, "stand," are often irritating. We know what is meant but expressing it in English involves a bit of inventiveness and we don't all think the same way. Odaállok az autóhoz could be, "I go and stand by the car" but there are other ways of expressing it and what's accepted can be a bit of a lottery.

Learn Hungarian in just 5 minutes a day. For free.